HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » So why did SoS Clinton ha...

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:48 AM

So why did SoS Clinton have a system set up outside

of approved channels and systems? Because she loved Blackberries too much? Just wondering.

143 replies, 10172 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 143 replies Author Time Post
Reply So why did SoS Clinton have a system set up outside (Original post)
mmonk Mar 2016 OP
Hoyt Mar 2016 #1
tk2kewl Mar 2016 #12
Hoyt Mar 2016 #21
tk2kewl Mar 2016 #26
Hoyt Mar 2016 #54
libtodeath Mar 2016 #67
tk2kewl Mar 2016 #71
Fawke Em Mar 2016 #77
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #83
Hoyt Mar 2016 #100
grasswire Mar 2016 #104
Hoyt Mar 2016 #117
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #119
Hoyt Mar 2016 #122
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #124
Hoyt Mar 2016 #132
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #137
grasswire Mar 2016 #127
Dem2 Mar 2016 #99
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #110
840high Mar 2016 #113
Hoyt Mar 2016 #120
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #121
Hoyt Mar 2016 #123
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #126
insta8er Mar 2016 #125
reformist2 Mar 2016 #49
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #23
libtodeath Mar 2016 #66
Hoyt Mar 2016 #118
Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #2
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #24
JoePhilly Mar 2016 #3
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #111
randome Mar 2016 #4
treestar Mar 2016 #116
Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #5
mmonk Mar 2016 #7
Hydra Mar 2016 #11
karynnj Mar 2016 #19
Hydra Mar 2016 #33
Gregorian Mar 2016 #17
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #18
riderinthestorm Mar 2016 #43
840high Mar 2016 #114
snappyturtle Mar 2016 #30
vintx Mar 2016 #41
HassleCat Mar 2016 #61
gwheezie Mar 2016 #82
dana_b Mar 2016 #88
JackRiddler Mar 2016 #109
840high Mar 2016 #115
farleftlib Mar 2016 #140
UglyGreed Mar 2016 #6
mmonk Mar 2016 #8
tk2kewl Mar 2016 #13
Dustlawyer Mar 2016 #51
UglyGreed Mar 2016 #68
PonyUp Mar 2016 #9
NWCorona Mar 2016 #34
HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #37
dragonfly301 Mar 2016 #53
speaktruthtopower Mar 2016 #10
karynnj Mar 2016 #14
mmonk Mar 2016 #28
GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #15
noiretextatique Mar 2016 #20
GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #29
Human101948 Mar 2016 #36
frylock Mar 2016 #63
GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #73
frylock Mar 2016 #74
GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #76
frylock Mar 2016 #78
GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #79
frylock Mar 2016 #87
uponit7771 Mar 2016 #138
mmonk Mar 2016 #31
baldguy Mar 2016 #42
mmonk Mar 2016 #50
baldguy Mar 2016 #60
mmonk Mar 2016 #62
baldguy Mar 2016 #65
Fawke Em Mar 2016 #80
baldguy Mar 2016 #134
mmonk Mar 2016 #135
baldguy Mar 2016 #139
mmonk Mar 2016 #141
baldguy Mar 2016 #143
One of the 99 Mar 2016 #45
RufusTFirefly Mar 2016 #84
One of the 99 Mar 2016 #142
Broward Mar 2016 #58
Gregorian Mar 2016 #16
Fuddnik Mar 2016 #22
AgerolanAmerican Mar 2016 #103
KeepItReal Mar 2016 #25
DCBob Mar 2016 #27
Fawke Em Mar 2016 #81
DCBob Mar 2016 #96
840high Mar 2016 #128
libdem4life Mar 2016 #86
DCBob Mar 2016 #94
libdem4life Mar 2016 #98
DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #131
Recursion Mar 2016 #32
karynnj Mar 2016 #44
Trust Buster Mar 2016 #35
karynnj Mar 2016 #46
baldguy Mar 2016 #47
DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #59
840high Mar 2016 #129
Fawke Em Mar 2016 #85
Trust Buster Mar 2016 #91
FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #38
RiverLover Mar 2016 #108
cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #39
PonyUp Mar 2016 #52
LexVegas Mar 2016 #40
polly7 Mar 2016 #48
peace13 Mar 2016 #55
mmonk Mar 2016 #101
w4rma Mar 2016 #56
Autumn Mar 2016 #57
mmonk Mar 2016 #64
pdsimdars Mar 2016 #69
Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #70
Zorra Mar 2016 #72
grasswire Mar 2016 #105
FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #75
libdem4life Mar 2016 #89
grasswire Mar 2016 #106
pansypoo53219 Mar 2016 #90
Name removed Mar 2016 #92
jalan48 Mar 2016 #93
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #95
mmonk Mar 2016 #102
grasswire Mar 2016 #107
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #112
DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #133
nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #136
840high Mar 2016 #130
OZi Mar 2016 #97

Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:52 AM

1. Well, she didn't do it to compromise our security. That's what matters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:11 AM

12. I know a guy who didn't drive drunk to hurt someone

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tk2kewl (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:23 AM

21. Except Clinton didn't hurt anyone. I get the email deal is your last desperate hope

Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:15 AM - Edit history (1)

for Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:26 AM

26. So by your logic drunk driving is ok as long as no one gets hurt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tk2kewl (Reply #26)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:14 AM

54. Look man, I'm tired of this junk with you guys. I'm not talking about friggin drunk drivers,

I'm posting about the friggin email deal that is a bunch of trumped up crud, and you ought to know it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:03 PM

67. Just sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:56 PM

71. the laws are for little people, I guess

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:58 PM

77. To those of us who work in cyber security, this is NOT "trumped up crud."

I earn my living trying to explain to others why following security protocols is necessary.

The security analysts I work with all say - no matter their political leanings - that if they had done what she's accused of doing, they would have already been in jail.

That the FBI is investigating and the NSA is now leaking about it and that her server guy has been given immunity all point to the fact that it's really NOT "trumped up crud."

But you keep your head in the sand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #77)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:16 PM

83. The biggest problem facing the country today is more people believe it's nothing

 

than understand it's a security risk the likes of which we've rarely seen.

The evidence is in the fact none of the sycophants will touch posts like yours.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #77)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:47 PM

100. Maybe you are a bit biased because of the source of your income. If classified

information was not involved, as appears to be the case, and if nothing of that nature was compromised, it's trumped up crud. Sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #100)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:14 PM

104. you are sadly using old talking points and not up to speed.

No one is going to take you seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #104)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:03 PM

117. Like you aren't using "talking points." Even your candidate says the email deal is BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #117)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:06 PM

119. Here is a news flash fer ya

 

I suspect Sanders, like you and most Americans do not understand the seriousness of this issue.

It took sitting down with people who once held clearances and reading emails, to realize just how serious this was, This is about country, not party. Oh and I understand why she shot herself on the foot, but this time she shot herself on the foot, metaphorically speaking of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #119)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:12 PM

122. Nadin, it's only serious in Sanders' and Trumps' supporters minds. Glad to know you are more astute

than "most Americans." A lot of Sanders' (and Trumps') supporters seem to have that belief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #122)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:16 PM

124. You ignore the FBI and the IGs... at your peril

 

As far as I am concerned the entertainment will come when you have to admit that maybe you were wrong. To be correct, I do not expect you to ever do so. But if there even the smell of an indictment or Comney goes to the press because argle bargle, party loyalties, and we begin Watergate II, you know what? I will stock up on popcorn. I could give two shits what happens to the Democratic (or republican) party at this point. I could also give two shits who your party nominates for the record.

But if you think this will mean this will be good for the COUNTRY, I got a bridge to sell you. It's down by the bay. And you are not unlike the Bush people defending Bush after the WMDs... it wasn't good for the country back then either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #124)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:39 PM

132. Sounds like you have been reading too much Judge Napolitano.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #132)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:48 PM

137. Nope sounds like I have been reading

 

News abroad, see Spiegel has run interesting stories as well as Foreign policy and other high level media and talked to sources with a clue.

Also it sounds I am not a partisan. This is like the early 2000s now with hard core democrats

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #117)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:27 PM

127. no, he didn't

He said he didn't want to be talking about it. And he said that months ago, before we know what we know now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:48 PM

99. Anything to terminate Hillary's campaign

That's why they use extreme examples that people associate with death.

They need to think she's the equivalent of a killer and thus her campaign must be "terminated".

It's a last gasp effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #54)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:45 PM

110. Some of us are talking of nothing serious

 

just National Security.

As to people hurt, yes, there are suspicions that HUMMINT assets have paid the ultimate price. So when you say none was hurt, you are actually wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #110)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:56 PM

113. Thanks nadin.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #110)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:09 PM

120. "Suspicions" -- LMAO, from whom? Even Sanders said the email issue is BS. Saw him right there on TV

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #120)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:10 PM

121. the idiots at NSA, and at least a couple of the the Inspector Generals

 

this has butkis to do with Sanders at this point, So save yourself that talking point, You just look silly, and I mean it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #121)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:15 PM

123. We'll know soon enough. Of course, when she is not indicted or anything else, you will rack it up

to a conspiracy by the Oligarchs to protect Clinton. It's all you've got.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #123)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:19 PM

126. Given they extended this from December, when it was supposed to be done

 

to May... and that they gave immunity to Pagliano, this does not look good. As I told you above. I care two shits who your party nominates. I really don't care. So save that talking point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tk2kewl (Reply #26)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:18 PM

125. LOL :)

 

Reminds me of the ...When did you stop beating your wife question, anyway you answer it...you are toast..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #21)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:57 AM

49. Sanders will continue to chip away at Hillary's shaky support, regardless of the damned e-mails.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tk2kewl (Reply #12)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:24 AM

23. That was the first thing that came to my mind as well...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #1)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:01 PM

66. You know this how?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #66)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:04 PM

118. You think she's a spy for Russia, ISIS or something? You guys crack me up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:53 AM

2. Like buying a golden bathtub. To flaunt her power and wealth.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tierra_y_Libertad (Reply #2)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:25 AM

24. ^THIS^ is the truth, right here.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:55 AM

3. Maybe she's a Russian spy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #3)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:47 PM

111. I know you are kidding

 

but given the number of agents from the FBI, that one was one they had to discount. I suspect that was discounted within ten minutes of the investigation starting, but that is actually a question they ask whenever investigations of this sort are started. Maybe it took them 15, but only due to the volume.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:58 AM

4. To keep the All-Powerful DU too busy arguing among ourselves to avoid the oncoming Fascist takeover.

 

She's a conniver, that one.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.
[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #4)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:02 PM

116. She learned sneaky cleverness

From that master of all, Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:59 AM

5. Didin't want anyone watching the deals she was

making for the Clinton Foundation while SoS?

just askin

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:01 AM

7. Good question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:11 AM

11. I vote for this

And she was planning a presidential run- having everything off the books would have been a top priority so she could be free to take whatever stance she wanted at any particular time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #11)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:20 AM

19. If so, it backfired spectacularly becoming a story on its own

At this point, every email she designated as work related has been made public, except for a few too secret. Consider that very few would EVER have been made public due to FOIA if they were always on the SD system. Nothing in them has risen to level of the story of setting up this unique private sever on which she wrote SD emails.

Note that it might have been possible had there been no controversy in her whole term that the system would never have been known. The reason it became known was they found very few emails meeting the Congressional inquiries and FOIA queries.


It seems like it took almost a year after HRC left for the SD FOIA people to realize and tell higher level people in the SD that they were missing HRC's emails. This sounds like a long time, but remember that HRC in first speaking of the server still was saying email was being captured by State.gov because she sent it to state.gov accounts. (Note that you don't have to be a genius to consider that had she actually created a state.gov account, she could have copied all her emails to that account - meaning the SD would have had a full record of everything she wrote (though obviously, unless all who were given her email were told to allow send to the SD account, the mail to her would not all be captured) In fact, she should have given the SD the email when she left -- not two years later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #19)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:28 AM

33. The Clintons practically live the mantra of "It seemed like a good idea at the time..."

Look at the Trump problem. Bill encouraged him to run, probably to sow chaos on the GOP side and take out Jeb and others.

As usual, it got a little out of hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:18 AM

17. That sounds plausible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:20 AM

18. plus communicating with blumenthal

after Obama banned him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #18)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:42 AM

43. +10 million! So obvious along with her pay to play going on with the Foundation nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #18)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:59 PM

114. .+1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:28 AM

30. +1 nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:37 AM

41. This seems the most likely to me, based on what we've seen so far. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:47 AM

61. There it is, right there!

 

All this babble about "security" amounts to nothing. The real abuse consists of using her position to promote her own interests, the foundation, special favors for her contributors, etc. Of course, most people don't see it as abuse because we're numb to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:11 PM

82. That doesn't make sense

If that was her purpose she would have used the government server for SOS business and had her private system set up for other business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:24 PM

88. ay.. yup!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:39 PM

109. Probably a lot bigger than that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:01 PM

115. Excellent answer.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Reply #5)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:25 PM

140. ^^^This^^^ eom

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:00 AM

6. To avoid FOIL requests

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:02 AM

8. It is good for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:14 AM

13. Probably on the advice of Kissenger

 

Apr 7, 2013 - WikiLeaks' Carter Cables II comprise 500,577 US diplomatic cables and other diplomatic communications ..... "The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UglyGreed (Reply #6)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:09 AM

51. FOIA Requests, and yes, I agree that this was the main reason.

She doesn't want us to know her real plans, her connections, benefactors, and shady shite! I believe the she wiped her servers with more than a cloth. There is no legitimate reason why she shouldn't use the government's server for her work, and private email for personal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #51)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:46 PM

68. I'm sorry in NYS

it is called FOIL requests. My bad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)


Response to PonyUp (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:30 AM

34. This is becoming more and more obvious

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PonyUp (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:32 AM

37. Seems to me that replies 5, 6 and 9 aren't mutually exclusive

and as hypotheses go, such a constellation is the sort of possibility that requires an expensive investigation to dismiss for lack of evidence.

What a waste.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PonyUp (Reply #9)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:12 AM

53. +1,000,000 eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:05 AM

10. Maybe

to some extent she was worried about permanent government people sympathetic to her political enemies reading her communications.

In any event it was bad judgment to use an unsecured system to send and received secret material, marked or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:15 AM

14. Just as Bill answered in 2004 about Lewinsky when he did book tours, "because she could"

Many have said she wanted a blackberry because that was what she was used to -- and specifically she did not want a laptop or a desk computer. Reasonable, IF IT WERE APPROVED. As SoS, there were likely hundreds of things she needed to get up to speed on. Spending time on technology might not have been a good use of her time.

However, as soon as she was given a definitive "NO", she should have worked with the NSA and tech people. Using a laptop or desk top in her office would not have been difficult. She did not have to set it up herself and she had a tech staff if things did not work. However, if seems as though she refused to take that "no" as an answer.

Why? That is where I get to "because she could". Nominating HRC as SoS, gave Obama a SoS that he could send to allied countries and it would be almost a Presidential visit given her own status as a former First Lady and her popularity and name recognition. He also got a person who has always been described as smart, organized and focused. He also tied the Clintons to him - making his interests compatible with theirs - meaning that the most likely center of Democratic opposition was stilled.

But, the cost was that he absolutely could not ask her to step down over anything. He likely did not know the full extent of the system she was using. Considering everything the President has to worry about, whether the SoS has set up her own computer network and was using it for State Department business, was likely not high on the list. Even if the issue was pushed up to him, ie in 2010, what could he do without imperiling his own Presidency and his reelection?

To me, this action and using Blumenthal, when she was told she couldn't, bespeak a level of arrogance that makes me worry that if elected, we can expect 4 years of completely avoidable investigations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #14)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:26 AM

28. A tough situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:17 AM

15. Why are Democrats propagating a Republican invented scandal against a Democrat?

What is the purpose of using a scandal cooked up entirely by Republicans on a board dedicated to Democrats?

One can only wonder why right wing talking points appear in discussions by Democrats, about Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:23 AM

20. is the FBI a republican group?

operating under rw talking points? is Obama in on it too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #20)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:27 AM

29. The origin of the email controversy is the Republicans in the House of Representatives

Just because the FBI gets drawn into a Republican meme does not mean that there is any substance to it.

There was nothing when Powell did it, and there was nothing when Rice did it and there is nothing there now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #29)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:31 AM

36. No, the origin of the controversy is HIllary Clinton...

 

It was a completely unnecesssary and avoidable "scandal."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #29)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:07 PM

63. And the origin of discovering the stained blue dress was Hillary's desire to withhold information.

Are you beginning to see a common theme here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #63)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:49 PM

73. Look! Over there - Its a red herring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #73)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:52 PM

74. If Hillary had just compliied with the request for those law firm papers..

we would have never heard of the stained blue dress. If Hillary hadn't tried to circumvent FOIA requests, we would have never heard of the private mail server.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #63)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:57 PM

76. Yea, the dress was a hit job on Bill Clinton

Just like this email deal is a hit job on Hillary Clinton.

There is a definite common theme here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #76)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:59 PM

78. So did the VRWC use mind control to get Bill to not have sexual relations with that woman?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #78)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:02 PM

79. Let's see

You have stretched the subject to include the dress.

You have stretched the subject to include Bill Clinton.

You are moving the subject to the VRWC.

You can continue until you find some point in the minutia to declare victory.

Enjoy your victory now because Bernie will not beat Hillary to the nomination.

Have a nice day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #79)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:24 PM

87. The common denominator is Hillary and her inability to comply with simple requests.

The Clintons bring this shit on themselves, and then the rubes fall for their perpetual victimhood schtik.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to noiretextatique (Reply #20)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:55 PM

138. The FBI isn't investigating Clinton they're investigating the SoS serverS, this is so beneeth folk

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:28 AM

31. I asked a question based on the fact of the system created.

No propaganda is in my op.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #31)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:42 AM

42. And yet you still fall for it.

 

That's the purpose of propaganda, isn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #42)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:03 AM

50. Fall for reality? It does exist. Are you saying it doesn't?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #50)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:40 AM

60. RW propaganda is not reality.

 

The inadequacies of the State Dept email system go back decades. Albright, Powell, & Rice had to deal with the same issues. The only difference is that Clinton actually did something to make the email system she was left with workable for her.

But the only SoS emails that we hear about is Clinton's. Why is that? Why is there no Congressional dog-and-pony show investigating the Bush Regime? Why don't we have a similar level of outrage about Powell's emails leading up to 9-11? Or about Rice's emails about the invasion of Iraq?

It couldn't be because you don't believe there were no crimes committed then, is it? But then, you're happy to allow the RW propaganda machine to lead you around by the nose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #60)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:52 AM

62. They did not create another server system.

They did use private emails.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #62)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:13 PM

65. Yes, they did use private emails.

 

Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice used private accounts for classified emails

Classified too. Tsk tsk tsk.

And lookie here:

FBI contacts Colin Powell as part of email probe

But those crimes aren't important - - Bernie's got nomination to win!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #65)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:09 PM

80. Whooossshhh..

They did not have private SERVERS, and hackable ones, at that.

Yes, they used their personal email from time to time, but that is not the same thing as setting up a server in their homes and using it exclusively.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #80)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:16 PM

134. "Whooossshhh" indeed.

 

Still no answer as to why Clinton inadvertently sending classified emails is the bombshell that will get her indicted & sent to prison - in spite of the fact that she's not the target of any investigation of any agency at any level - but Powell & Rice doing the exact same thing for the exact same reasons doesn't even rise a level of being acknowledged by the RW propaganda machine.

Because what's driving this story is the RW propaganda machine. That this dead horse is still being flogged by Berniestas speaks volumes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #134)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:24 PM

135. I didn't ask about emails.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #135)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 09:21 PM

139. You're promoting a RW agenda insisting that Clinton conform to a standard of conduct

 

that is literally applied to no one else on the planet.

And you don't even begin to try and justify it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #139)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:29 PM

141. Serious? They've applied to everyone involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Reply #141)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 05:51 AM

143. Where are the transcripts of Powell being grilled by a Congressional committee for 11 hours?

 

Where were the endlessly repeated demands for Trumps emails for the multiple lawsuits against him, or Christies for the bridge closing, or the outrage for Jeb for the destruction of his email server after he left the Governor's office?

They don't exist. The RW propaganda machine has deemed that only Clinton should be subject to such close scrutiny. And you're more than happy to follow their orders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:47 AM

45. I have to agree.

Benghazi and the emails are GOP invented scandals.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to One of the 99 (Reply #45)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:16 PM

84. Nope. Republican witch hunts may have poisoned the well...

... but these are real scandals. The inventor of the email scandal is Hillary Clinton's obsessive secrecy and aversion to transparency. In fairness to Secretary Clinton, the inventor of the Benghazi scandal is probably the CIA. But the State Dept. under Clinton made things much worse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RufusTFirefly (Reply #84)

Mon Mar 21, 2016, 02:12 AM

142. So Sad that you're believing GOP propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreydeeThos (Reply #15)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:33 AM

58. One can only wonder why so many DUers uncritically support corporatist

politicians and policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:17 AM

16. So Bill could look over her shoulder?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:24 AM

22. So no incriminating public records are left.

The Bush Administration did this quite well, conducting under the radar, and possibly illegal behavior on personal laptops and e-mail.

What was she hoping to hide? What was in the 30,000 deleted e-mails?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fuddnik (Reply #22)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:02 PM

103. the nightmare scenario

 

What disturbs me the most is that there really is no solid foundation for ruling out the possibility that she was selling state secrets and getting paid through the Clinton Foundation. A server compromised in a known way as a means of providing access would be an effective method of creating plausible deniability.

Whatever it is, there's something that is seen as heavy enough to grant the server admin immunity to talk about. I just don't see that happening absent a substantial crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:25 AM

25. Initially, because the NSA said she could not have a secure Blackberry like POTUS

That's one reason. Why the NSA said no is not clear...maybe because she travels overseas too much and the cellular networks she'd roam on could be compromised.

I also have to blame POTUS and/or Rahm as Chief of Staff for not reigning in her use of personal email when it first arose.

Either way, it was a bad decision.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:26 AM

27. Convenience and control.

I might have done the same if I were her given the circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #27)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:11 PM

81. You would allow hackers to get into your private server and view national secrets?

Nice to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #81)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:20 PM

96. In case you were not aware, there are ways to block hackers.

Apparently Hillary's IT guy set it up securely since the logs appear to show the server was not hacked.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #96)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:30 PM

128. We don't know that for sure.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #27)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:21 PM

86. Well then, that settles it. LOL

 

Not. As IT professionals, who are not generally considered ignorant and blind, have put it, a Non-HRC person could/would be in jail. I'm assuming you are not one of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #86)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:18 PM

94. Actually, the FBI report will settle it.

BTW, I am an IT professional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DCBob (Reply #94)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:45 PM

98. Thanks for that bit of info...we agree...the FBI will settle it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #98)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:37 PM

131. Any IT professional knows that a system can be hacked and log entries wouldn't show it. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:28 AM

32. She could always have a Blackberry. Rice had a blackberry. She was always allowed

to have a Blackberry. The way people are getting the Blackberry angle 180 degrees wrong is kind of exasperating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #32)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:44 AM

44. Did you ever move from one job to another that meant you needed to change your technology?

The fact is she was told she could NOT use a blackberry - so, no, she was not always allowed to do so for work. (Obviously, if she wanted a blackberry for personal calls, no one would have cared.)

Not to mention, if that was the SOLE reason -- and it is pretty lame, she could have insured that the SD had all her email. Imagine, she, first, had her tech person set up TWO accounts for her on her server - one for work, one for business. Then had the tech person, move all her incoming and outgoing email to a State.Gov account - say at the end of every week or month.

That would have assured that the FOIA requests and the Congressional inquiries had everything they needed. Had that happened, there likely never would have been any public knowledge that she did this. Rules could be written to assure that no one else did the same - though this is such a strange thing to do that I doubt any future SoS would have thought to do so.

I resent what she did because her selfish action could ultimately cast shadows on the reputations of Obama and Kerry, both better people than the Clintons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:31 AM

35. Because our government was/is unprepared for the digital revolution.

 

Last edited Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:44 PM - Edit history (1)

Powell and Rice also had problems with the archaic computer system at State. Our government servers get hacked on a daily basis. You can blame Hillary solely for political reasons but, it's pretty apparent that are government is still not prepared for this digital age.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #35)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:49 AM

46. However, shouldn't her response have been to demand more changes in the SD system?

Powell is credited with greatly improving the computer system. Clinton just left the system -- and did not bother to insure that teh SD got the emails that they should have always had in a reasonably timely way. Had she given the SD, her incoming and outgoing work email - say on a monthly basis, she would STILL be using her server, but there would have been no problem in getting the info for FOIA requests.

In doing what she did, she herself stonewalled the Congress and others and made it impossible for the SD to be as forthcoming as they might have wanted when she was gone -- they did not have the information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #35)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:54 AM

47. The email bullshit is nothing but political. It's RW propaganda designed solely to attack a Democrat

 

The fact that it's been taken up so readily by Sanders supporters speaks volumes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #47)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:35 AM

59. There is saying that includes a sex act and a chicken...

There is saying for this thread that includes a sex act and a chicken but I won't repeat it in this forum because it's vulgar and alertable.

If anybody wants to know the saying they can send me a private message.


PEACE
DSB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #47)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:32 PM

129. You really think 2 judges, FBI are rw?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trust Buster (Reply #35)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:20 PM

85. "Our government servers get hacked on a regular basis."

Yes - but only those with outward-facing servers.

Servers like SIPRnet and JWICS do NOT face out. You cannot email from them. They are insular and very protected. And they are NOT hacked. You know what's kept there? National security secrets. The OPM's server, for example, doesn't house national security secrets. It's sad that the employees had their information stolen, but the information the hackers garnered doesn't put the nation at risk.

You know what's been found on Hillary's server? Emails containing information that had been physically copied (typed up) from SIPRnet and sent, unencrypted, to Hillary on a server that didn't even use a dual authentication VPN and could be pinged directly from the Internet.

Sorry, but the "the government is hacked all the time" meme needs to die. Our government does not keep the nation's secrets on servers that can be hacked with the exception of, well, Hillary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #85)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:46 PM

91. Hillary was the most traveled Secretary of State in U.S. history.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:34 AM

38. Because when you are preparing for a global crime spree

the last thing you want is some pesky oversight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FlatBaroque (Reply #38)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:36 PM

108. ^^^ LOL! True.

Which is why, as soon as she left the office of SoS, they made having a private server for govt business illegal.

Prior to her, no one ever imagined someone would do such a thing.

But then, no one prior to her was accepting million$ from people they were granting favors for as SoS & had such things to hide. Too bad she didn't seem to care about putting the US in danger in the process, with such a lousy system that an unemployed painter in Eastern Europe could hack into it via Blumenthal.

A guy Obama didn't even know she was getting intel from. Jeezus, people are being so gullible about her. It would be easier to believe the made for TV version, but that is so far from reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:35 AM

39. Apparently, the road to the Presidency is paved with "He/She did it first!"

 

The elites don't care about anything but keeping up with the other elites.

Whatever wrong a fellow elite gets away with becomes a "precedent" other elites aspire to and something elite sycophants readily excuse like a puppy excuses being beaten if you toss it some kind of meaningless treat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cherokeeprogressive (Reply #39)


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:36 AM

40. Death throes of a dying campaign. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 10:55 AM

48. Libya. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:15 AM

55. Possibly....

 

....because it is easier to run from sniper fire with a Blackberry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to peace13 (Reply #55)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:57 PM

101. They are light.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:18 AM

56. The server was set up so that FoIA requests would return the answer, 'We have no records'.

 

This server was set up to do exactly what it accomplished. It was designed so that no records would exist at the State Department, so that when Freedom of Information Act requests were filed there, the answer would be 'We have no records'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 11:27 AM

57. FOIA requests is why I believe she set up an outside system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #57)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 12:11 PM

64. Yes, I believe that to be a reason.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:50 PM

69. Because she and people like her, thin they are above the rules that apply to everyone else.

 

They think they are special.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 01:51 PM

70. It was a deliberate effort to frustrate the Freedom of Information Act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:07 PM

72. I can answer this. It was to be able to make business deals with and for wealthy private interests

outside the boundaries of her license, duties, and responsibilities of her position as SOS, and outside the scrutiny approved state channels and systems.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #72)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:24 PM

105. concise and pertinent.

Also outside the view of POTUS.

I cannot understand why the NSA (who had to see her extra-lawful communications) did not inform POTUS. Or perhaps they did, and he is playing a dimensional chess game on her. She dissed him and betrayed him (and is now hugging him) and that makes me maddest of all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 02:56 PM

75. Because 9/11

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:34 PM

89. Paganini was not offered immunity for a day in the park. He was her IT guy.

 

There are three others, Huma Abedin being one, who could take a hard fall for this. No one is dumb here. They were pre-meditated get arounds, and as they now begin to lead into the Foundation, and Slick Willy returns to "fundraise", well, the Democrats may live in The River of Denial aka Benghazi-farce, but the Republicans are waiting in the Gotcha mode.

We nominate her at our peril. Bill's no longer the brightest bulb. All of Trump's baggage is pretty much out there and he skips right over it. Her past baggage, as well. This is far newer, pay to play, enormous wealth and the FBI is not the vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libdem4life (Reply #89)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:25 PM

106. yep nt

potential of Watergate-style blowup.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:44 PM

90. because govt procurement is BACKWARD. slow, low power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 03:54 PM

93. CONTROL.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:19 PM

95. Not quite unplaced paranoia with the RW

 

the problem is that this was a self inflicted wound. And that is just the most obvious answer... there are a panoply of others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #95)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 05:59 PM

102. Yep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #95)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:28 PM

107. hey, the wealth of the world is at stake here

Untold riches await the Clintons. The military power to depose any world leader and re-shape the whole of the world. Rivers of gold flowing into the pockets of cronies. Wealth without measure.

Worth fighting for, if you're a Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #107)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 06:51 PM

112. I am not willing to go down that road

 

I do not believe she is the source of all evil, or Sauron... this was set to avoid the kind of 1990s witch hunt, and well. self inflicted would... if or rather when this explodes though, the only ones to suffer will be the country. The party will as well, but that is truly incidental to me. This scandal may very well give the presidency to Trump.

History will not be kind to the Clintons tough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #112)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:45 PM

133. History will not be kind to the Clintons tough.

 

But the future will be soft and shiny.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocracyDirect (Reply #133)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 08:24 PM

136. History will not be kind

 

And the stuff of nightmares involves pain

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #95)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 07:36 PM

130. Yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mmonk (Original post)

Sun Mar 20, 2016, 04:32 PM

97. Delete, deflect, plausible deniability.

Nothing to see here folks. Move along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread